Bush Is Criticized for Mideast Role

New York Times ^ | Tuesday, April 2, 2002 | DAVID E. SANGER and MICHAEL R. GORDON

[JohnHuang2]

WASHINGTON, April 1 — President Bush, under rising criticism for his handling of the growing violence in the Middle East, expressed frustration today that Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, has failed to denounce what he called the "constant attacks" of suicide bombers. Continues.

=============================================================

The 'Who-Gives-A-Hoot?' Democrats

Sooner or later, it was bound to happen. To some observers, the wonder isn't that it's happening, but that it took so long to begin with.

In Washington, partisan politics has reared its ugly head, yet again. This time the tussle concerns volatile events in the Mideast -- the Israeli-Arab crisis, specifically.

Democrats and their media surrogates are probing for ways to take political advantage of the situation. The wave of deadly suicide bombings and Israel's robust military response have dominated the news of late, even as Afghanistan has fallen off the pages: Clearly, Democrats see it as an opening for them to take potshots at the Bush administration.

So far, they're calling on Bush to 'get more involved', a stealthy way of suggesting the crisis is Bush's fault, without actually saying it and without tendering detail plans nor initiatives of their own.

"I think there needs to be something dramatic done", Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told CBS' Face The Nation. "The President has to step up his involvement", he added.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who is mulling a run for president himself, told Fox News Sunday that Bush should "ask Secretary Powell...to go to the Middle East".

Terrorists inevitably interpret such fickleness as a green light to continue doing what they're doing. 'Keep bombing crowded Pizzerias and Discotechs, and wait for the Joe Bidens of the world to cave like cheap suits'. The torrent of suicide bombing attacks that have recently rocked Israel are, for terrorists, a pressure tool -- the means by which they hope to extract further concessions from the beleaguered Jewish state.

But for Joe Biden partisans, and Democrat mouthpieces like the New York Times, politics takes precedence over patriotism, any day of the week -- America's or Israel's security be damned.

For partisan Democrats, 'if our words of appeasement send the wrong message -- who gives a hoot?'

'Mr. President, send Colin Powell to wring more concessions from Israel, and if terrorism is ultimately rewarded -- who gives a hoot?'

'Mr. President, have Gen. Zinni exert pressure on Israel, and if suicide bombers are vindicated -- who gives a hoot?'

'Mr. President, offer a bold, new peace initiative, get on your hands and knees and beg chairman Arafat to accept it, and if bloodshed and carnage by Palestinians is validated thereby -- who gives a hoot?'

You've heard of 'Yellow Dog Democrats'. We'll call these the 'Who-gives-a-hoot?' Democrats.

With midterm elections drawing closer, and President Bush's approval ratings still straddling the stratosphere, Democrats are growing increasingly desperate. They do know one thing for sure: Bush's sustained popularity is an obstacle to recapturing control of the House and preserving their 1-seat plurality in the Senate.

But the boiling crisis in the mideast has given Democrats, at least for now, a glimmer of hope. They see it as a chance to undermine public confidence in Bush as a leader, and knock his popularity down to earth. At every opportunity, Democrats will try to link Bush to every mideast "setback", big or small, and call it a colossal "failure" of his policies. And if it gives aid and comfort to cold-blooded terrorists -- who gives a hoot?

There's only one itsy-bitsy problem with this "strategy": It won't work. But Democrats are too blind, too partisan, too hateful, too bitter, too vicious, too petty, too spiteful, too angry, too desperate to know it just yet. But it'll dawn on them, eventually -- give it time.

My two cents...
"JohnHuang2"

[DoughtyOne]

Arasplat has got to go.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks.

[Alberta's Child]

If Arafat disappears from the scene, do you really think the Palestinian people are going to settle down and become as docile as lambs?

Even the most militant Israelis don't believe that, which is precisely why he is still alive. In Israel's mind, the only thing worse than Arafat is who comes after Arafat.

[Sabramerican]

I think there needs to be something dramatic done", Sen. Joseph Biden

Come clean Joseph. Did you really think it yourself, or did you steal it from someone?

[DoughtyOne]

Let me see, 120 dead in the last 65 day, 500 plus injured. Tell me, what is worse than Arasplat? As it is Israel has nobody to make peace with. How would that change post Arasplat? Let's face it. Nobody wants to admit it, but the PLO still exists. They still plan on kicking Israel into the sea. Total extermination is the only objective. The sooner this is admitted in public and dealth with, the better.

[PhiKapMom]

If it means anything, I agree with what you are saying! Almost not worth the time to post on some of the threads because it seems some of us are out of touch on here with the majority of posters recently!

[Alberta's Child]

Let me see, 120 dead in the last 65 day, 500 plus injured. Tell me, what is worse than Arasplat? As it is Israel has nobody to make peace with. How would that change post Arasplat?

How about 240 dead, 1000+ injured?

[DoughtyOne]

Okay. Answer these questions. How long has Arasplat been the leader of the Palestinians? How long has Israel been trying to make peace with him? How much success have they made? Is this violence calming down or escalating? Is the prognosis bright or dim?

At some point the answers to these question must convince any thinking human that this isn't working. Otherwise the concept of "process of elimination" is totally worthless. There is NO REDEEMING VALUE to keeping Arasplat around.

Outside of some childlike pipe dream that out of the blue Arasplat will change his spots just around the corner, there isn't one reasonable arguement for not exiling him to hell.

Yes, 200 killed and 1000 injured is worse. And you know what, you've just given the best reason I know of the get rid of this cockroach. For that's exactly where Israel is headed unless they do. Like it or not, it's time.

[Alberta's Child]

You tell me which is worse -- a cockroach like Arafat as the nominal head of the Palestinians, or a scenario where there is no Palestinian leader? In the second case, you will likely see groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Fatah, etc. would be competing with each other to see who can do a better job of destroying Israel.

[DoughtyOne]

It's my opinion that you are offering up reasons not to get rid of Arasplat that are already taking place.

Thanks for the comments.

D1

[Helms]

Demos gearing up for Election 2002. As well as distracting us from Der Sleikmisters Entertainment Presidency.

[anniegetyourgun]

No, I don't acknowledge that he is approaching this as Clinton did. Neither do I see his wife embracing Arafat's wife.

[LarryLied]

If it means anything, I agree with what you are saying! Almost not worth the time to post on some of the threads because it seems some of us are out of touch on here with the majority of posters recently!

Well, thanks! I just listened to a bunch of simpering liberals on MSNBC and CNN. Thought I was on a Free Republic thread. Bush isn't doing this, Bush isn't doing that, Bush needs to call Arafat a terrorist, Bush needs to get more involved,Bush doesn't know what he is doing. . .Bush...Bush...Bush...Bush.

These people are doing exactly what everyone knows messed us up in Nam: micro-managing a war on a daily tactical basis with no long term strategy.

Bush isn't doing that. Rumsfeld, Rice and yes, even Powell are not idiots. And they are instant contact with the best military and political minds in the world. People should realize things which make little sense today are done for strategic, not tactical reasons.

Look at any war. It takes years to know what really was going on.

[JohnHuang2]

Thank you.

[JohnHuang2]

You're welcome, my friend. And thank YOU for the compliments.

[JohnHuang2]

And Bush is too open, too realistic, too transparent, too smart, too feeling and too honest to be drawn into being the "star" of the conflict by ringing a bell and holding the principle parties at bay. This time the referee is not ringing the bell to give the appearance that something is happening or to elevate the ludicrous notion that Arafat is doing something to stop the terror.

Let the world see how much they want peace. Let the world consider how this would have been played out if the situation had been reversed. How patient would Arafat have been year after year after year, if it was his people being terrorized by stone throwing, bomb wearing Israelis and he had the ability to move in and stop it?

Couldn't have been stated better, Cincy. Good morning, btw =^)

[JohnHuang2]

You're welcome, amigo.

[JohnHuang2]

Thanks, friend. And keep up the great job with the graphics.

[JohnHuang2]

Thank you, thank you, friend =^)

[JohnHuang2]

OK =^)